894 replies to this topic

[KevinH]

Falzis responds to Sojourner on Day 2:

What knowledge did you get and why did your gut tell you to vote for me? I'm starting to think we really should have lynched you on D1. 3 Votes on you and not even just 1 more for a half-majority lynch? Even just one Mafia could have killed you if you were townie.

I am inclined to believe that the 3 who voted for you are all townies, I'm more or less sure of that (junk - proven townie, plus EM and I).

OH MY GOD I AM HAVING A EUREKA MOMENT!!!

sojourner is really scum. there's no other way to it. now, some people here may not believe it because I will be saying I am townie, and you have no way of proving that until I die.

but hear me out. I am townie!! junk was proven to be townie (cop). EM I really am inclined to believe is a townie. so if you follow these assumptions, there were 3 townie votes on sojo.

now, there are at least 2 (a very conservative number, other people estimate 3-4 but let's assume 2 for the sake of my argument) scum in this game. even just one of the two could have voted for sojo for a half-majority lynch (4 votes instead of 7).

if sojo was townie, and we assume Kevin's correct that mafia want to lynch on D1 to lessen townies, then sojo should have been dead on D1!! this could only mean that sojo wasn't a townie and his fellow scum didn't vote for him.

my original hunch WAS correct!! (i posted this theory just right after D1 i think but narsis shot it down).

now, i know what you're thinking. this is assuming that I and EM are townie. i know i can't definitively prove to you my townieness (or EM's for that matter) but you can judge on your own based on our posts. i hope you trust and believe in me when i say i think i am on the scum's tracks!!

but let's assume for the sake of argumentation that EM and I, or one of us, are scum. if scum voted for sojo, then that means he is townie. if sojo is townie, and scum voted for a townie on D1 and stuck to it until the end of D1, this means that the scum was/were willing to lay their cards out on D1 and intended to go for a D1 lynch.

but let's look at the first one. are scum really willing to lay their cards out early on D1? we've discussed this extensively and i think we all know that scum generally try to blend with the town and lie low, so the first conclusion is counter intuitive, which means that the premise - that EM and I, or one of us, are scum - is false!

but wait, there's more convincing logic! let's look at the second one. if the scum intended to go for a D1 lynch, this could only mean two things.

one, that if EM and I are both scum, that there are only 2 scum in this game - which is highly improbable according to the estimations of the veterans in this game (ie. Narsis and Kevin's estimate of 3-4 scum) - thus still proving that EM and I couldn't be scum!

two, that if one of us, EM or I, is scum, that the other scum(s) didn't vote for sojo - which is inconsistent with the manifested intention to lynch on D1 - thus proving all the more that EM or I couldn't be scum!

SO THE CONCLUSION IS, sojo couldn't be a townie if even just one of EM or I were scum since sojo wasn't lynched on D1.

oh my god oh my god.

EUREKA!!

Unvote
Vote: sojourner

EBWOP: but the above one is still correct, i'm just not sure on the grammatical difference in meaning on the positioning of the words even and if (I'm thinking in Tagalog and just translating in English lol we have different subject-verb and sentence agreements)

SO THE CONCLUSION IS,

sojo couldn't be a townie even if just one of EM or I were scum since sojo wasn't lynched on D1.

What say ye now?

[KevinH]

logical deductions? where?

Are you reading all the posts? I'll quote it again for you:

KevinH did the following:

1. Muddled and distracted town scumhunting with to-lynch-or-not-to-lynch-on-D1 debate up until D2. Insisted that pro-lynching is a scum tell (nvm that not lynching increases mafia chances of winning accdg to mafiascum wiki)

2. Disingenuously edited out the sentence in mafiascum wiki countering the validity of no-lynch strategy. Misleading in the highest order. Silence when confronted by it.

3. Role fished. Accdg to mafiascum, those who smealt em dealt em. Meaning, those who role fished persistently either have that role, or scum looking for with those roles.

4. Pushed for my head and EM's stating a BIG BIG wifom that "we could be mafia who NK'd junkahoolic to make sojourner look like scum", when his original logic pointed his suspicion to sojourner. The inconsistency came about when he was shot down by the town for simplistic logic.

... I'll address the 4 points.

1. I did not "muddle and distract" the town. I stated early that I was voting for no-lynch. In the end, 3/4 of the players agreed with me. I am glad that we have an extra townie today; the scum wish we would have lynched a townie.

2. I did not "disingenuously edit out a sentence". I quoted a statement that supported my position that not everybody agrees that it is best to lynch on the first day.

3. I did not "role fish". And even if I did, so what?

4. I did vote for Falzis and gave my reasons. That's what we are supposed to do. The post regarding Sojourner was obviously not logically sound because of the WIFOM effect. Adding additional suspicions is not "inconsistent" despite what Falzis may say.

Now having defended myself point by point, I'll address why I did not "build a case" against Falzis. It's simply that I know he could easily be a townie attacking me with the best of intentions. I believe he is as good a lynch candidate as any. However, the game will certainly slow down without his posts and if the group wants to make the case for lynching an inactive rather than Falzis, I won't be too disappointed.

[KevinH]

... maybe KevinH has nothing to defend.

... play style has reflected throughout this game as "I am townie. Believe it and deal with it".

... KevinH just doesn't post home run posts, he's a contact swinger and I like that.

Thank you for the support. You must have had a fine Minnesota education!

[KevinH]

VOTE COUNT
Falzis (4): Martino, Theophilos, KevinH, sojourner
KevinH (3): Sir Jesus, Aquinas, Narsis
Nerau (1): Electric Mango
sojourner (1): Falzis

Not Voting (3): Nerau, partyin01, Kaziocore

VOTE COUNT
sojourner (6): Falzis, Narsis, Electric Mango, Kaziocore, Aquinas, Sir Jesus
Falzis (4): Martino, Theophilos, KevinH, sojourner

Not Voting (2): Nerau, partyin01

Oohh I just noticed from EM's quote of voting patterns on D2 that Kaziocore was the only one who didn't vote for KevinH amongst those who voted for sojourner. If KevinH turns out to be scum, we can look towards the direction of Kaziocore.

Why is this suspicious?
You are starting with "amongst those who voted for sojourner" as if only that set contains scum.
I put forth that there is also scum amongst those that didn't vote for Sojourner.

It's a moot point regardless, since I won't turn out to be scum.

[KevinH]

All I ask is an analysis from KevinH why he couldn't be scum based from his actions, non-actions, and voting patterns.

...

KevinH didn't answer his internal contradiction stating he agreed my defense of my innocence was solid, and he really couldn't argue against it but in the same breath say I'm still scum. It's one or the either (sic).

Why I Can't Be Scum Based On My Actions, Non-Actions, and Voting Patterns

My actions have always had the benefit of the town in mind. When others want to risk lynching a possible cop, I want to keep him alive. When others want to beat the odds and think they'll get lucky, I want to play the odds and maximize our chances. My non-actions also benefit the town. I don't make wild accusatations based on hunches, bad logic, or supposed scum-tells. I point out facts and help others draw the same conclusions as I have made. My voting patterns are always pro-town. I vote to lynch when it is in the best interest of the town and I vote for the best choice given the information available at the time. Therefore, I can't be scum.

I did answer the contradiction of saying the defense was solid yet maintaining a vote. The points made could possibly indicate all actions were taken by a well-intentioned townie. However, given all available information I believe the best course of action is to vote to lynch a player that twice voted to lynch a now-known townie.

[KevinH]

Why I Can't Be Scum Based On My Actions, Non-Actions, and Voting Patterns

My actions have always had the benefit of the town in mind. When others want to risk lynching a possible cop, I want to keep him alive. When others want to beat the odds and think they'll get lucky, I want to play the odds and maximize our chances. My non-actions also benefit the town. I don't make wild accusatations based on hunches, bad logic, or supposed scum-tells. I point out facts and help others draw the same conclusions as I have made. My voting patterns are always pro-town. I vote to lynch when it is in the best interest of the town and I vote for the best choice given the information available at the time. Therefore, I can't be scum.

Here's the ironic part, though: I'd play this way even if I were scum. Trust me, this time I'm townie!

[Electric Mango]

His proposal to have the strong doctor role claim was very strange.

Please quote exactly where I said I wanted the doc to role claim. I'd love to see it.

I was liking your post up until the part where you said stuff about me that wasn't true. This entire game I have been nothing but upfront and honest about everything, trying to play as transparent as possible. The only player who has contributed as much or more than I have is Falzis, now we are both drawing suspicion? I always find it ironic that people who put themselves out there the most to try to help the town win always seem to draw the fire, while others who hardly contribute (Sir Jesus and others) get a free pass.

[Narsis]

Here's the ironic part, though: I'd play this way even if I were scum. Trust me, this time I'm townie!

even more ironic: you suggest that there may be scum in the people that didn't vote for soj, but you also want people to vote against those that have voted against soj. contradiction much?

[Falzis]

Why is this suspicious?
You are starting with "amongst those who voted for sojourner" as if only that set contains scum.
I put forth that there is also scum amongst those that didn't vote for Sojourner.

It's a moot point regardless, since I won't turn out to be scum.

Ugh hello. Your point is ridiculous because the point I was making by voting for you is precisely what you said, that I believe there is a scum amongst those that didn't vote for Sojourner (or more exactly those that voted for me) and it happens to be that I suspect you to be the scum (if also Theophilos, but that's another story).

Plus, there are only three people in the other camp. You (KevinH), Theo and Martino. So tell me, who do you (KevinH) think is the scum in that other side? Of course you'd have to choose between Theo and Martino... unless you're the scum.

[KevinH]

even more ironic: you suggest that there may be scum in the people that didn't vote for soj, but you also want people to vote against those that have voted against soj. contradiction much?

Do you give a free pass to the whole set that didn't vote for Sojourner? I didn't think so.

It's a matter of probabilities. It is very likely that that one or more scum voted to lynch a townie. That's where we should seek to lynch today.

Nevertheless, it is still quite possible that not all scum voted to lynch the townie.

If there's a contradiction here, I don't see it.

[Falzis]

I think you're just trying to make me sound like a fool here. I may have been unclear, I am not convinced of your scuminess although I think it is likely. I meant to convey that "I think" and "I am convinced" are two different degrees of certainty.

I'm not trying to make you look like a fool, I'm trying to make you look like someone who isn't sure of what he is saying, which could be a scum tell.

Anyway, I don't agree with your semantic gymnastics as I think you are trying to deftly maneuver out of a tight spot. I'm still keeping an eye on you.

[Falzis]

Knock knock KevinH. Pressure time. Who do you think is scum amongst the three of you that voted for me?

[Falzis]

What say ye now?

I say:

One, the assumption that scum wanted to lynch a townie was wrong and that scum chose to hide and not vote was the correct conclusion on scum D1 actions.

Two, dare I say, the analysis about my and even EM's innocence still stands precisely because of number One. We can't be scum since if scum voted for sojourner, he should have died because there was a manifested intent to lynch and there was a violation of the conclusion from number One that scum chose to hide.

Three, to that extent, I am extending the umbrella of innocence to Sir Jesus since he voted and didn't choose to stay under the radar.

[Falzis]

Knock knock KevinH. Pressure time. Who do you think is scum amongst the three of you that voted for me?

And I would also love to hear finally why would you vote for me if you believe that my defense was a solid and inarguable case? I asked you that before and I've yet to hear the answer. Please don't say "You're still the best candidate" because if you believe my defense, which argues my innocence, you shouldn't vote for me at all.

[KevinH]

Plus, there are only three people in the other camp. You (KevinH), Theo and Martino. So tell me, who do you (KevinH) think is the scum in that other side? Of course you'd have to choose between Theo and Martino... unless you're the scum.

You leave out Nerau-Narsis and CanucksDynasty. If I had done something like that, you'd be accusing me of attempting to mislead.

[Falzis]

You leave out Nerau-Narsis and CanucksDynasty. If I had done something like that, you'd be accusing me of attempting to mislead.

But we're talking of people who voted. They were inactives. You said so yourself. There could be a scum in the other camp. I didn't assume you were talking about the inactive camp.

[KevinH]

And I would also love to hear finally why would you vote for me if you believe that my defense was a solid and inarguable case? I asked you that before and I've yet to hear the answer. Please don't say "You're still the best candidate" because if you believe my defense, which argues my innocence, you shouldn't vote for me at all.

I believe your defense could be true. Just as I said that I play the same whether I'm townie or scum, you could be a scum making all the right townie arguments.

If you don't want me to say you're the best candidate, I phrase it this way: everyone else is a worse candidate.

[KevinH]

From Day 1:

VOTE COUNT
sojourner (3): Electric Mango, Falzis, junkahoolik
No Lynch (1): KevinH

Not Voting (9): Kaziocore, Aquinas, Narsis, Theophilos, Nerau, Martino, Calderone, sojourner, Sir Jesus

Hypothesis: Electric Mango and Falzis are scum. The 3rd scum that was needed to lynch the townie on day 1 was an inactive player at the time.

It's as good a theory as any.

[KevinH]

But we're talking of people who voted. They were inactives. You said so yourself. There could be a scum in the other camp. I didn't assume you were talking about the inactive camp.

Let's quote what I really said:

I put forth that there is also scum amongst those that didn't vote for Sojourner.

Twisting my words? Is that a scum-tell?

[Narsis]

I say:

One, the assumption that scum wanted to lynch a townie was wrong and that scum chose to hide and not vote was the correct conclusion on scum D1 actions.

Two, dare I say, the analysis about my and even EM's innocence still stands precisely because of number One. We can't be scum since if scum voted for sojourner, he should have died because there was a manifested intent to lynch and there was a violation of the conclusion from number One that scum chose to hide.

Three, to that extent, I am extending the umbrella of innocence to Sir Jesus since he voted and didn't choose to stay under the radar.

you do have a point...although what happens if two decided to stay under the radar and one didn't. or vice versa. any combination of scum could have voted or not voted as long as the result wasn't a lynch.

also, where did SJ vote and not stay under the radar?